Tag Archives: civil right attorney

Post navigation

This is a very valuable site, it has so many links for you to see that you & I are not alone, there is corruption everywhere, this site deals with mostly Police Misconduct, but it has lots of useful links & information. This site will be closing but the new site can be found HERE

A few people who I have referred to this site have made me aware that this site is closing. The site’s info is still available, & hopefully it will be of some use to you. My problems have not been with the Police Department, so it is not relevant to me but there are some good links to other resources to help you with most types of legal problems. It also has enough good information to keep you informed about your rights & current news & events.

UPDATE:
I am at a stall with my investigations into Stevens County until I get the records I requested. Here’s a smile for the day. The lady who’s case I am investigating & the prosecutor seems to have run out of his own words & is using mine now.

In order to get records from Stevens County you have to go through the prosecutor’s office, if they somehow decide to grant your request they forward it on which seems pretty shady to me, but that’s how they do it.

They asked what I needed the records for & I said to establish a pattern of harassment. The “Information Officer” told me alot of the details of the case & invited me to come to Stevens County so I could look at all of the evidence. I called the lady back & asked her if A B C D E & F are true & what her side of the story was on it.

Two things happened that day. She evidently wrote a letter to the prosecutor/information officer, & Mr Rasmussen called her attorney ONCE AGAIN threatening to press new charges on her. Some time later the Info Officer forwarded me her letter, which quite frankly I didn’t understand but then I laid into him about harassing her, about having a bunch of innocent rescuers going over there trying to save dogs lives because the a-holes told us all if we didn’t get the dogs off of her property they were going to mass execute all of them. They keep telling the rescuers that they are not at fault for going onto private property & taking someone’s dogs, livestock & property & I told them they needed to quit lying to people & cited the laws that were broken & told them I finally had proof of Mr R’s wrong doing as far as his charity was involved & I’ll be damned to hell if with 90 minutes of my email Mr Rasmussen didn’t send a Sheriff Gowin down to her property to ENTER ILLEGALLY without a search warrant to come on her property & start taking pictures of her tenants, & contractors, dogs & horse. I got a call from the contractor who was afraid for his own life but Ms D. was on the ground & the Sheriff just let her lay there so the poor guy ran down the driveway about 400 feet to help her up. He was terrified for his own dogs as well & hid them.

So I finally got a hold of Ms D. last night through Yazmine & found out that now Mr Rasmussen is once again threatening/bargaining with Ms D. attorney. The State Court of Appeals has agreed to hear her case but threw out the states motion & chastised them on top of it. So Mr R asked Ms D’s attorney to ask her to drop her appeal & he would drop the probation violation… The problem with that is HE HAS NO JURISDICTION to do so, the agreement with the appellate court basically puts a “stay” on all proceedings, so he can’t do anything about it either way but it should be noted that he believes he has more power than the Washington State Supreme Courts do. Obviously that didn’t work so then he reverts back to threats & here is where he runs out of words.

Ms D. sent out 2 emails to various people who are currently withholding information on the whereabouts of her dogs BECAUSE Mr Rasmussen is telling them they are in the right ONLY to cover his butt because he knows when the boom falls it’s going to land on him & he doesn’t care if he takes the rest of us with him. SO now he is threatening to file charges against Ms D. for harassment for requesting information saying that “He was going to show a pattern of harassment” pretty much used MY words for the rest of it too. Even though I pointed out that him filing additional charges & harassing her further would ONLY bolster her case & show it for what it was. Malicious harassment. Plain & simple.

This is what happens when folks start to think they are above the law. So if Ms D. shows up dead or completely disappears we know who to look at, following are the 2 letters I sent to them.

THIS WAS MY EMAIL IN RESPONSE TO HIM SENDING ME HER LETTER.

I see the letter I don’t understand the letter. I don’t think she is speaking to me but since I stuck my own feet in it & everyone here has their butts in a sling over the legalities of these dogs, who are now in loving homes, except for the 5 that were lost or killed. Everyone’s attorneys are referring them back to the case in Spokane where they adopted out a dog from another jurisdiction, so everyone here is liable for civil & possibly criminal action depending on how far she is willing to take it & she doesn’t really have anything to lose either way. Everyone is lawyered up & waiting for the boom to fall. Other rescues have contacted me saying that someone in your office is telling them she can’t do anything, that they have nothing to worry about & that is a bald faced lie. Then Mr Rasmussen is threatening to press more charges on her, for what I don’t know but all that is doing is adding FUEL to her fire, she has already lost almost everything. I really have tried to come up with ways where this could work out for everyone, she wants her dogs & property back, she is legally entitled to that, & because of the shoddy job that your lawyers did for the appeal court they won’t even hear your side of the case & are moving forward with her’s. Please get a tape of it & look over it, someone should’ve at the very least thrown in a case or two & in the Justices’ response they even said it not their job to make a case for the state. So on these very important last 2 issues it looks from all perspective she will win & then not only will your county be screwed, but lots of good rescuers who were doing nothing more than your office’s bidding because you had an insane sheriff telling everyone he was going to kill the dogs if we didn’t move our butts into gear & get them out, when in reality she was not on the property, some of the animals weren’t even hers but Glover had to be a jerk & I do mean to tell you he is a jerk & he said he was acting under Mr Rasmussen’s orders to several of us. Every lawyer up here is itching for a shot at you guys.

I really appreciate the time & effort that you spent on me, & I have nothing against anyone up there except for Mr Rasmussen for getting all of us involved in his big headed issues & that Officer Glover. I want to write him a letter myself, before he tries to utterly destroy someone he should make sure they are destroyed, this one has some fight in her & a caveat for if she dies!!! Remember she used to be the sweetheart of some mighty big firms over here, which puts a lot of folks over here in a bind because a lot of the good lawyers are conflicted out. It’s just like with my own issue, over here, I tried to explain to everyone, you don’t take EVERYTHING from someone & leave them standing, because then they have nothing to lose, all they have is time to focus on the issue. I also hope that Mr Rasmussen understands any new charges at this point will look exactly like what it is, pure & simple retaliation. I have read most of the statements that I have access to & the only people who were against her were people she had had issues with before, legal issues, so that doesn’t look good, my understanding is the video authenticator said the tapes were so spliced & diced that they wouldn’t be any more admissable than tapes of bigfoot at the mall.

I am going to try to go down to her place over here & see if I can talk to her again, to atleast see if we can get her to leave some of the rescuers out of this, but I took her to see 2 of her dogs here, they were so shell shocked that even I cried for them. I go every week up into the mountain looking for her other dog(s) that were lost, & most times it ends with me sitting down bawling my head off because I have never failed a dog that miserably, we think 1 of them is dead, but the boy has a gimpy foot & I find his tracks quite often. These are not my dogs, so I can only imagine how she must feel, if she didn’t fight for them then I would question her motives. I am on a sinking ship either way, & Stevens County’s ship is taking on water too. No one is going to “win” in this case.

I still don’t understand the purpose of the ferocity of the prosecution of Ms D., it was ALL OUT WAR, it bordered on illegal from the beginning. She writes an article, 2 weeks later her property is raided, she pisses off a horse thief, Mr Rasmussen sends neighbors over to harass the dogs & her. Next thing you know she is sitting in jail, he illegally orders all of her property disposed of, she is denied medial access & outside access from the jail, til her piece of garbage lawyer comes to see her to tell her all of the animals were gone & that he wasn’t doing anything more on her case, who by the way is one of the lawyers who donated to Mr Rasmussen’s partner charity that turned around & donated the money back to him. Do you see where this is NOT looking good for any of us? The idiots who posted on the news stories, in the comment sections pretty much gave her all the ammo she needs. Because of the bad advice Mr Rasmussen is giving them they thought they were in the right but these past few weeks they have found out they are not. I would not be surprised if you end up with about 20 more records requests by the time this goes to appeal. I am trying to clear my schedule so I can come over there personally to see the court stuff as well. Thank you for forwarding my request to the Sheriff’s office, though.

Again all I want to know is why it was so important for Mr Rasmussen to totally annihilate Ms D..

Brandia

THIS WAS MY LETTER TO HIM AFTER I FOUND OUT THAT OFFICER GOWIN HAD COME DOWN ON HER PROPERTY & ENTERED ONTO HER PROPERTY ILLEGALLY & TOLD HER THAT MR RASMUSSEN HAD SENT HIM DOWN THERE

Really?????????? I just went down to see Pam she is not here, she is over there, cause she had to keep an eye on her contractor & Mr Rasmussen sent a sheriff out to her property to take pictures & harass her. Are you guys serious? Her tenant called me in a panic saying she WAS ON THE GROUND & THE PIECE OF CRAP SHERIFF JUST LEFT HER THERE! What is wrong with you people???? I am calling the newspapers & TV stations in the whole state & giving them all the paperwork I have from the charities & all of the other info I have about Mr Rasmussen. I really hope he is proud of himself, the contractor has also sent me VIDEO from his cell phone!!! This is why I don’t believe one line of spiddle that comes out of Mr Rasmussen’s mouth. If anything happens to her I am going to make sure all of you are held accountable in every way. I am also contacting her tort lawyer & forwarding everything to him so even if she has a damn heart attack none of you will have gotten away with this. What kind of agency leaves a senior woman on the ground to die, yes she could’ve died. If anything happens to her in the meantime YOU WILL ALL BE ACCOUNTABLE, & remember getting rid of her does nothing she has an attorney that is going to proceed in the case of her death. How dumb can you all be? I want the public disclosure records, all of them. That is all.
Rev. Brandia Taamu

Okay I don’t know if the most people realize this or not: I can tell WHO visited my blog as well as the search terms they used. So in case you were wondering I am not taking the deal, I am not going to let you get away with this sit, I am not going to drop my tort claim, I will not do a diversion because I AM NOT GUILTY, you are wrong, what you did was wrong & I am not going to back down, so snoop around all you want, it doesn’t matter, anything I say in a public forum you can’t fight, because you broke the law, trampled on the Constitution & you are liable. Where is my dogs body??? What did you do with him? What kind of a stupid ass bunch of morons gut an animal stick post it notes all over his internal organs, stick your hands in his intestines & take photos of you doing so??? Then LOSE HIM!!! Are you all frigging insane? Or are you just that sick in your heads? Do you believe I am as stupid as you think I am? I am not, I see what you are trying to do & you are not going to do it. This is absolute insanity. I will take my chances in court & if nothing else I will take it to appeal, try to dangle my animals in front of my nose when we were just a couple weeks away from court? YOU HAVE WITHHELD MY ANIMALS FROM ME FOR 198 DAYS & YOU THINK I AM GOING TO JUST TAKE IT LIKE A GOOD LITTLE B*TCH WHEN I DID NOTHING WRONG??? I would suggest you pull your heads out of your ass but I’m not entirely sure which one is which!!!

For those of you who are interested I have added 4 of the 8 pages, because I only got 4 of the 8 pages & I’d probably be even more PISSED if I had the other 4 pages if they are as stupid, insulting & assinine as the first four!!!

HERE IS ALL THE NEWEST INFO ON THE CHARITY THAT MR RASMUSSEN SUPPOSEDLY MAKES NO PROFIT OFF OF BUT GETS 13,000.00 GRANTS FROM. AMAZING & NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY HE SO VEHEMENTLY ATTACKED A PERSON HE WAS PROSECUTING ABOUT HER 501(C)3 SAYING SOME VERY OFF THE WALL THINGS ABOUT FRAUD & SECTRETING AWAY FUNDS OR PROPERTY… IT IS TRUE SOMETIMES PEOPLE ACCUSE OF WHO THEY ARE OR WHAT THEY ARE DOING. NO WORRIES BECAUSE I HAVE FORWARDED THIS TO HER AS WELL SO SHE MIGHT BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE HIS RANTINGS CAME FROM. I’M SURE SHE CAN USE IT IN HER CASE AS WELL. JUST PUT IT THIS WAY, I AM TIRED OF CORRUPTION, THE GOOD OLD BOY CLUBS & PROSECUTORS & JUDGES WHO THINK THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW. I AM GOING TO BE THE ONE WHO GOES AFTER EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD & I’LL DAMN SURE BET YOU, YOU’LL RUN OUT OF INK BEFORE I DO! IF EVEN SO MUCH AS ONE HAIR ON THIS WOMAN’S HEAD IS DISHEVELED I WILL MAKE SURE I BRING EVERY AGENCY I CAN TO YOUR SLEEPY FILTHY LITTLE TOWN. IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE NOW, YOUR OPPONENTS CAN SEE THIS NOW, THE MEDIA CAN SEE IT. IT IS ALSO NOW COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE THREATENED THIS WOMAN. YOU ARE NO MORE THAN A BULLY WHO WEARS MORE MAKE-UP IN ONE PHOTO SHOOT THEN I WEAR ALL YEAR, BLOG ALL YOU WANT I CAN BLOG TOO, BLOW YOUR OWN HORN ALL YOU WANT BECAUSE I WILL BE THERE TO WATCH YOU FALL & OH WHAT A AWESOME SOUND IT MAKES WHEN THE MIGHTY FALL. HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LOCKED UP IN YOUR COUNTY THAT SHOULDN’T BE? WORSE YET HOW MANY ARE WALKING AROUND FREE THAT SHOULDN’T BE??? THE GREATEST TRICK THE DEVIL EVER PULLED WAS CONVINCING THE WORLD HE DID NOT EXIST. I KNOW WHERE HE LIVES…

THIS IS PART OF THE STATEMENT THAT MR RASMUSSEN MADE TO THE BAR ASSOCIATION… YET IF THEY HAD BOTHERED TO ACTUALLY INVESTIGATE THEY WOULD’VE MOST CERTAINLY FOUND THIS. ISN’T THE BOARD MADE UP OF LAWYERS? SO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION? WHY IS IT IF I CAN FIND ALL THIS INFO ON LINE, WHY CANT THE WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION? TO UNDERSTAND THEIR GOOD OLD BOY CODE OF HONOR IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THERE HAS ONE BEEN ONE CASE OF A PROSECUTOR EVER REPRIMANDED IN THE STATE OF WASHNGTON: JUST TO CLARIFY, THE WSBA HAS ONLY REPRIMANDED ONE PROSECUTOR EVER IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF OUR STATE EVEN THOUGH THOUSANDS OF CASES BEFORE THE APPELLATE COURTS CLEARLY SHOW PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT

Tim Rasmussen: “I am a board member of Water for Life International”… “I have never solicited or accepted any donations from any Washington criminal defense attorney for Water For Life International.” …. “I have accepted donations from Washington criminal defense attorneys who are friends to assist an orphanage in Guatemala. “… To do that I asked people I knew to donate to International Children’s Care for the Guatemalan facility.” All donors received a receipt for their in-kind donation directly from International Children’s Care” …”We pooled our resources and bought things for the campus and children. . . . “We sent the things in containers of equipment being sent to the orphanage by the drilling project.” . .. “ I did not benefit in any way, directly or indirectly from any contribution . .”.. “The Guatemalan Orphanage …is owned and operated by International Children’s Care which is based in Vancouver, Washington.”… “I am not connected to them in any way … except I have made donations and solicit donations from friends to assist the orphanage in Guatemala.”.

WATER FOR LIFE
“Container Travails – By Tim Rasmussen”
The container left Spokane for Guatemala on Dec 18. In it was the diesel air cooled engine, more steel well casing, stems of tools, welders, parts, 10 new hand pumps, the special deep well pump for JabonChe, and of course, some things for the orphanage.
We had been told the container shipment would take about 21 days, so Gary Bartholomew was expecting the container would arrive in the second week of January. That week and the next came and went, and still there was no word about the container. Inquires to our shipping agent revealed that the container had been offloaded in Mexico and not put back on the ship. The explanation was vague about why it came off the ship and even more vague about when it would be put back on a ship We were assured however, it would be on the next ship to Guatemala, whenever that would be be!
On January 21, Annette and I left Guatemala. It was a long 23 hour shuttle on and off planes from Flores to Cancun to Houston to San Francisco to Spokane. About a week after we got home, Gary was told the container had come into the country and was in the customs process. At least it had made it into the country.
The container was in the customs process for one week and no word. Then the shipping agent told us that for some reason, the container had been selected for special inventory inspection. The reason behind this selection was unknown, but maybe because it had made an unscheduled stop in Mexico. They insisted on checking on 75% of the contents. There was nothing to do but wait.
Finally on about Feb 15, Gary was told the container would be released immediately upon payment of about $7,000 US. There were the usual charges for storage during the inspection, the inspection itself, and a fee for this and a fee for that. Then he was told that if he waited for 2 more days there would be different supervisor and the fee would be about $500 US less! Gary thought for a moment but realized the extra charges and the waiting truck and the fees would make it about a wash. Gary paid the duty and got the shipment out of that den of thieves as quickly as he could. (I guess the word “thieves” is not politically correct, but that is the word that comes to mind.) The container was 58 days in transit, but he was happy we finally had it, until he opened the door.

What a bunch of Crap! What Timothy Rasmussen Doesn’t Say:
International Children’s Care is an organization which works through various partnership organizations. “VERSACARE” is one of its partner organizations. The VERSACARE Board oversees the assets from its Care Center operations and carries out its grant activities through THE VERSAFUND which annually distributes Grants to various supporting ministries and other qualified organizations, primarily within the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. WATER FOR LIFE (Tim Rasmussen is the Chairman of the Board) is a Seventh-day Adventist organization which is operating this year on a 2011 grant of $13,000 from THE VERSAFUND (See Grant recipients below). VERSACARE is one of the primary partner organizations of INTERNATIONAL CHILDREN’S CARE (the organization which Tim Rasmussen claims he is not connected with in any way, and that he receives no benefit from directly or indirectly from any donation.)

When used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) A “bona fide officer or employee” of a charitable organization is one (a) whose conduct is subject to direct control by such organization; (b) who does not act in the manner of an independent contractor in his or her relation with the organization; and (c) whose compensation is not computed on funds raised or to be raised.

(2) “Charitable organization” means any entity that solicits or collects contributions from the general public where the contribution is or is purported to be used to support a charitable purpose, but does not include any commercial fund-raiser, commercial fund-raising entity, commercial coventurer, or any fund-raising counsel, as defined in this section. Churches and their integrated auxiliaries are not charitable organizations, but are subject to RCW 19.09.100 (12), (15), and (18).

(3) “Charitable purpose” means any religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purpose or any other purpose that is beneficial to the community, including environmental, humanitarian, patriotic, or civic purposes, the support of national or international amateur sports competition, the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, the advancement of social welfare, or the benefit of law enforcement personnel, firefighters, and other persons who protect public safety. The term “charitable” is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.

(a) Is regularly and primarily engaged in making sales of goods or services for profit directly to the general public;

(b) Is not otherwise regularly or primarily engaged in making charitable solicitations in this state or otherwise raising funds in this state for one or more charitable organizations;

(c) Represents to prospective purchasers that, if they purchase a good or service from the commercial coventurer, a portion of the sales price or a sum of money or some other specified thing of value will be donated to a named charitable organization; and

(d) Does not ask purchasers to make checks or other instruments payable to a named charitable organization or any entity other than the commercial coventurer itself under its regular commercial name.

(5) “Commercial fund-raiser” or “commercial fund-raising entity” means any entity that for compensation or other consideration within this state directly or indirectly solicits or receives contributions for or on behalf of any charitable organization or charitable purpose, or that is engaged in the business of or is held out to persons in this state as independently engaged in the business of soliciting or receiving contributions for such purposes. However, a commercial coventurer, fund-raising counsel, or consultant is not a commercial fund-raiser or commercial fund-raising entity.

(7) “Contribution” means the payment, donation, promise, or grant, for consideration or otherwise, of any money or property of any kind or value which contribution is wholly or partly induced by a solicitation. Reference to dollar amounts of “contributions” or “solicitations” in this chapter means in the case of payments or promises to pay for merchandise or rights of any description, the value of the total amount paid or promised to be paid for such merchandise or rights.

(8) “Cost of solicitation” means and includes all direct and indirect costs, expenditures, debts, obligations, salaries, wages, commissions, fees, or other money or thing of value paid or incurred in making a solicitation.

(9) “Entity” means an individual, organization, group, association, partnership, corporation, agency or unit of state government, or any combination thereof.

(10) “Fund-raising counsel” or “consultant” means any entity or individual who is retained by a charitable organization, for a fixed fee or rate, that is not computed on a percentage of funds raised, or to be raised, under a written agreement only to plan, advise, consult, or prepare materials for a solicitation of contributions in this state, but who does not manage, conduct, or carry on a fund-raising campaign and who does not solicit contributions or employ, procure, or engage any compensated person to solicit contributions, and who does not at any time have custody or control of contributions. A volunteer, employee, or salaried officer of a charitable organization maintaining a permanent establishment or office in this state is not a fund-raising counsel. An attorney, investment counselor, or banker who advises an individual, corporation, or association to make a charitable contribution is not a fund-raising counsel as a result of the advice.

(11) “General public” or “public” means any individual located in Washington state without a membership or other official relationship with a charitable organization before a solicitation by the charitable organization.
(12) “Membership” means that for the payment of fees, dues, assessments, etc., an organization provides services and confers a bona fide right, privilege, professional standing, honor, or other direct benefit, in addition to the right to vote, elect officers, or hold office. The term “membership” does not include those persons who are granted a membership upon making a contribution as the result of solicitation.

(13) “Other employee” of a charitable organization means any person (a) whose conduct is subject to direct control by such organization; (b) who does not act in the manner of any independent contractor in his or her relation with the organization; and (c) who is not engaged in the business of or held out to persons in this state as independently engaged in the business of soliciting contributions for charitable purposes or religious activities.

(18)(a) “Solicitation” means any oral or written request for a contribution, including the solicitor’s offer or attempt to sell any property, rights, services, or other thing in connection with which:

(i) Any appeal is made for any charitable purpose;

(ii) The name of any charitable organization is used as an inducement for consummating the sale; or

(iii) Any statement is made that implies that the whole or any part of the proceeds from the sale will be applied toward any charitable purpose or donated to any charitable organization.

(b) The solicitation shall be deemed completed when made, whether or not the person making it receives any contribution or makes any sale.

(c) “Solicitation” does not include bingo activities, raffles, and amusement games conducted under chapter 9.46 RCW and applicable rules of the Washington state gambling commission.
RCW 19.09.100 Conditions applicable to solicitations.

*** CHANGE IN 2011 *** (SEE 1485-S.SL) ***
The following conditions apply to solicitations as defined by RCW 19.09.020:

(1) A charitable organization, whether or not required to register pursuant to this chapter, that directly solicits contributions from the public in this state shall make the following clear and conspicuous disclosures at the point of solicitation:

(a) The name of the individual making the solicitation;

(b) The identity of the charitable organization and the city of the principal place of business of the charitable organization;

(c) If requested by the solicitee, the published number in the office of the secretary for the donor to obtain additional financial disclosure information on file with the secretary.

(2) A commercial fund-raiser shall clearly and conspicuously disclose at the point of solicitation:

(a) The name of the individual making the solicitation;

(b) The name of the entity for which the fund-raiser is an agent or employee and the name and city of the charitable organization for which the solicitation is being conducted; and

(c) If requested by the solicitee, the published number in the office of the secretary for the donor to obtain additional financial disclosure information on file with the secretary. The disclosure must be made during an oral solicitation of a contribution, and at the same time at which a written request for a contribution is made.

(3) A person or organization soliciting charitable contributions by telephone shall make the disclosures required under subsection (1) or (2) of this section in the course of the solicitation but prior to asking for a commitment for a contribution from the solicitee, and in writing to any solicitee that makes a pledge within five working days of making the pledge. If the person or organization sends any materials to the person or organization solicited before the receipt of any contribution, those materials shall include the disclosures required in subsection (1) or (2) of this section, whichever is applicable.

(4) In the case of a solicitation by advertisement or mass distribution, including posters, leaflets, automatic dialing machines, publication, and audio or video broadcasts, it shall be clearly and conspicuously disclosed in the body of the solicitation material that:

(a) The solicitation is conducted by a named commercial fund-raiser, if it is;

(b) The notice of solicitation required by the charitable solicitation act is on file with the secretary’s office; and

(c) The potential donor can obtain additional financial disclosure information at a published number in the office of the secretary.

(5) A container or vending machine displaying a solicitation must also display in a clear and conspicuous manner the name of the charitable organization for which funds are solicited, the name, business address, and telephone number of the individual and any commercial fund-raiser responsible for collecting funds placed in the containers or vending machines, and the following statement: “This charity is currently registered with the secretary’s office under the charitable solicitation act, registration number . . . .”

(6) A commercial fund-raiser shall not represent that tickets to any fund-raising event will be donated for use by another person unless all the following requirements are met:

(a) The commercial fund-raiser prior to conducting a solicitation has written commitments from persons stating that they will accept donated tickets and specifying the number of tickets they will accept;

(b) The written commitments are kept on file by the commercial fund-raiser for three years and are made available to the secretary, attorney general, or county prosecutor on demand;

(c) The contributions solicited for donated tickets may not be more than the amount representing the number of ticket commitments received from persons and kept on file under (a) of this subsection; and

(d) Not later than seven calendar days prior to the date of the event for which ticket donations are solicited, the commercial fund-raiser shall give all donated tickets to the persons who made the written commitments to accept them.

(7) Each person or organization soliciting charitable contributions shall not represent orally or in writing that:

(a) The charitable contribution is tax deductible unless the charitable organization for which charitable contributions are being solicited or to which tickets for fund-raising events or other services or goods will be donated, has applied for and received from the internal revenue service a letter of determination granting tax deductible status to the charitable organization;

(b) The person soliciting the charitable contribution is a volunteer or words of similar meaning or effect that create the impression that the person soliciting is not a paid solicitor unless such person is unpaid for his or her services;

(c) The person soliciting the charitable contribution is a member, staffer, helper, or employee of the charitable organization or words of similar meaning or effect that create the impression that the person soliciting is not a paid solicitor if the person soliciting is employed, contracted, or paid by a commercial fund-raiser.

(8) If the charitable organization is associated with, or has a name that is similar to, any unit of government each person or organization soliciting contributions shall disclose to each person solicited whether the charitable organization is or is not part of any unit of government and the true nature of its relationship to the unit of government. This subsection does not apply to a foundation or other charitable organization that is organized, operated, or controlled by or in connection with a registered public charity, including any governmental agency or unit, from which it derives its name.

(9) No person may, in conducting any solicitation, use the name “police,” “sheriff,” “firefighter,” “firefighters,” or a similar name unless properly authorized by a bona fide police, sheriff, or firefighter organization or police, sheriff, or fire department. A proper authorization shall be in writing and signed by two authorized officials of the organization or department and shall be filed with the secretary.

(10) A person may not, in conducting any solicitation, use the name of a federally chartered or nationally recognized military veterans’ service organization as determined by the United States veterans’ administration unless authorized in writing by the highest ranking official of that organization in this state.

(11) A charitable organization shall comply with all local governmental regulations that apply to soliciting for or on behalf of charitable organizations.

(12) An entity soliciting contributions for a charitable purpose shall not include in any solicitation, or in any advertising material for a solicitation, or in any promotional plan for a solicitation, any statement that is false, misleading, or deceptive. All solicitations, advertising material, and promotional plans must fully and fairly disclose the identity of the entity on whose behalf the solicitation is made.

(13) Solicitations shall not be conducted by a charitable organization or commercial fund-raiser that has, or if a corporation, its officers, directors, or principals have, been convicted of a crime involving solicitations for or on behalf of a charitable organization in this state, the United States, or any other state or foreign country within the past ten years or has been subject to any permanent injunction or administrative order or judgment under RCW 19.86.080 or 19.86.090, involving a violation or violations of RCW 19.86.020, within the past ten years, or of restraining a false or misleading promotional plan involving solicitations for charitable organizations.

(14) No charitable organization or commercial fund-raiser subject to this chapter may use or exploit the fact of registration under this chapter so as to lead the public to believe that registration constitutes an endorsement or approval by the state, but the use of the following is not deemed prohibited: “Currently registered with the Washington state secretary of state as required by law. Registration number . . . .”

(15) No entity may engage in any solicitation for contributions for or on behalf of any charitable organization or commercial fund-raiser unless the charitable organization or commercial fund-raiser is currently registered with the secretary.

(16) No charitable organization or commercial fund-raiser may engage in any solicitation for contributions unless it complies with all provisions of this chapter.

(17) No entity may place a telephone call to a donor or potential donor for the purpose of charitable solicitation before eight o’clock a.m. or after nine o’clock p.m. pacific time.

(18) No entity may, when contacting a donor or potential donor for the purpose of charitable solicitation, engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, intimidate, or torment any person in connection with the contact.

(19) Failure to comply with subsections (1) through (18) of this section is a violation of this chapter

I would like to welcome a new guest writer, who is from the area,& has a better vantage of the comings & goings on in the Stevens County area. Hopefuly Jaz will help us fill in many more blanks!

An Expose by Yasmin Madjidi

Don’t re-elect them – it’s far too costly!

Government prosecutors, first and foremost, are lawyers who are, or should be, subject to the rules of professional conduct that apply to every lawyer in Washington State, with one caveat – the bar for assuring fairness and total truthfulness in proceedings is HIGHER, not LOWER for prosecutors.

Recent investigations across the U.S. have documented that misconduct by prosecutors is on the rise. Those excesses are often in flagrant violation of the very laws prosecutors are sworn to uphold. From Boston to L.A. to Seattle to Colville and all points in the middle, intense scrutiny reveals that our war on crime has become a war on the rights of U.S. citizens and our Bill of Rights.

The dark side of the war on crime is dawning – prosecutors who cheat, cut corners, who intentionally offer false testimony and fabricated evidence, conceal evidence of innocence from defense and the court, trample defendants’ rights, and the Constitution. The reason for this is not that winning is everything; it’s the ONLY thing to them! The winning at any cost attitude is not just a local problem in Stevens County, Washington. It’s occurring everywhere in courtrooms across the U.S.

But sadly it’s occurring in Stevens County, Washington as well. Under the current regime, war on crime is a war on the Bill of Rights. Prosecutors in Stevens County are known to sacrifice justice to win cases. Cases are being reversed at the appellate levels. This is expensive. Abuses by prosecutors at the local trial may include prosecutorial misconduct such as withholding of exculpatory evidence (evidence of innocence), tampering with evidence, suborning perjury, improper arguments, knowing use of false evidence, using snitches or witnesses who are known liars, ex parte contacts, leaking news to the media about pending cases to sway jury pools, altering the record, and so on. Unfortunately, many of these misdeeds go uncorrected at the trial level due to overworked Stevens County public defenders who do not have the resources nor the time to investigate properly.

Unfortunately for Stevens County victims of prosecutorial misdeeds, not enough bad prosecutors are brought to justice for breaking the laws in pursuit of “justice”. Most of us are aware of the power to cause injury by those in authority who abuse their positions. All we need do is look to Wenatchee, Washington to the child sex abuse witch hunt, and the wrongful arrests and prosecutions by a crusading officer. Some 60 kids were ripped from their families and 17 were adopted out.

Changes in federal sentencing laws in 1984-1986 gave prosecutors, not judges or juries, the exclusive power to choose who does time and who does not. Now it’s a prosecutor who determines a defendant’s sentence through charging decisions, or later on in a motion for sentence review. Consequently, a Stevens County, Washington prosecutor a few years out of law school, rather than a judge with years of experience, may be the one with a life in his hands, or deciding who goes to jail and for how long. This kind of “heady” power over people’s lives leads to what I call a “god complex” and myopia, wherein a prosecutor is out of control having lost all perspective.

A “win at all costs” mentality resulted in the reversal in United States v. Berger (295 U.S. 78 (1935)). This same mentality is found all over state and federal courts. Prosecutors and cops lie, hide evidence, distort facts, engage in cover-up, pay for perjured testimony, and set up innocent people. It is a never ending effort to “win” indictments, guilty pleas or convictions. Stevens County is no stranger to the victims of this conduct. Sometimes the victims lose their jobs, assets, and even families. Some remain in jail or prison because prosecutors withheld favorable evidence, or encouraged fabricated testimony even perhaps from persons with a history of previously lying on the record. But that may never be disclosed to defense. Some criminals are hailed as heros or do-gooders, and walk away as a reward for conspiring with cops or prosecutors in their efforts to “win”, while denying others their lawful rights. Stevens County is a small tight knit community. Citizens know about these victims of the system.

Cops and prosecutors in Stevens County may pursue justice by breaking the laws in the relentless battle to “win”. Strong words? Perhaps. The philosophy of the current regime in Stevens County seems to be that whatever works is what is right – no matter the cost to the good citizens in Stevens County, Washington.

What if there aren’t any big crimes going on in the County – the kind of crimes that make for news headlines, promotions, fodder for blogs, and re-elections?

Prosecutors and police in Stevens County have a ready-made solution to that problem — go out and make a big crime and generate the headlines. “Build it and they will come” – the wins, that is.

An attitude of authorities in Stevens County that is far more prevalent than the average person is aware of is contacting witnesses and potential cooperating defendants – without their lawyers present. Stevens County authorities consider this a valid tactic even though justice guidelines discourage it, and it’s considered a violation of the professional code of ethics in every state. To compound this, there is no room in the Stevens County jail house that is safely sound proof so that a defendant may speak freely with his attorney without eavesdropping by jail staff – who then report to the prosecutor, sheriff, or other supervisor.

Pro se defendants in Stevens County, Washington are also obstructed by jail staff from using the Stevens County law library to represent themselves so that they can exercise their legal rights. Jailers schedule various daily and evening meetings in the very same conference room where the law library is located. Pro se defendants then cannot use the law library during most days and evenings. This is also unlawful but a custom and practice in the Stevens County, Washington jail.

Prosecutors in Stevens County have a weighty responsibility. Unfortunately under the current regime, some may take it lightly. They might feel that the person sitting in the defendant’s chair is guilty. But that person still deserves justice and a fair trial by not being convicted by prosecutorial misconduct. It is equally deplorable when a truly guilty person is unlawfully convicted because of the resulting effect on the victim, his family, and the system. Sometimes the State has a truly good case against the defendant, but it may end up later reversed, ruined by ego and overreaching misconduct.

In Stevens County, Washington, prosecutors get all the money they need including government grants to hire experts, investigators, etc. to secure a “win”. The overworked public defenders in the Stevens County contract system work for the defendants, who are the working poor or the indigent. Some of the Stevens County contract lawyers have never defended a felony case, while a few have never had much, if any, jury trial experience when they signed up. The court appointed lawyers in Stevens County may even have to use their own personal credit cards to pay for experts, investigators or trial exhibits, as they are given little or no money to defend the client by Stevens County judges. The prosecutor gets it all. The flat rate policy that is customary under the Stevens County public defender contract results in very minimal representation for poor defendants who only get moments of a public defender’s time – usually at the time of a hearing. Such a policy tends to encourage prosecutors and contract defenders to “broker” cases, and fosters an otherwise “incestuous” relationship between prosecutors and defenders. (In other words, don’t tell your public defender anything you don’t want the prosecutor to know).

Also unfortunate is that many players in the Stevens County, Washington system including cops, judges, defense lawyers, and other prosecutors are good people, and quite aware this stuff happens. However, most are willing to turn a blind eye – perhaps feeling that’s how it works, or that it’s okay to bend the truth sometimes when you are going for a “ greater good”. If a young prosecutor speaks up and challenges the regime, he may be sent packing.

Twisted sense of justice? Yes. Citizens certainly don’t need crusaders in Stevens County who believe that the means justifies the end for the “greater good”, and that “winning” is all that matters. It is expensive for each of the hard working citizens in Stevens County – in more ways than one.

I don’t know about you, but I’m not of the mindset that it is the civic duty of any innocent man to give up his rights and go to jail so the guilty man won’t go free.

I know it’s close to fire season, but the scorched smell is not from burning woods or fields in Stevens County this year, or a homemade bomb. I believe it’s our own Constitution.

Oh how the dirty may fall… Do you hear the sound of the Stevens County “House of Cards” falling?

So for those of you who have been following this case:

Deskins V Stevens County Wa.

First they convicted her of a false trumped up charges, stole every single thing she worked for over 40 years for including her personal pets & highly prized farm animals, then her conviction was overturned, & now she is appealing the rest of her charges. Well the state appeals court agreed to hear HER case & denied to hear Stevens County’s case. So it seems the last 2 charges will be dismissed & then she is going to sue the living sh*t out of them, I will so enjoy watching them squirm. She has lost almost everything, but unfortunately people I know & love are withholding her animals & property from her under Mr Rasmussen & Detective Glover’s orders, she was denied medical care in jail & had to have open heart surgery within a week after she was released, she is now fighting a foreclosure, all of her cars are gone, her career is ruined, but she will now be vindicated!!! The court was so unimpressed with the state’s motion that it went as far as to let them know that they would not research the case & make it for them, it also recognized something very important in agreeing to hear the case, the animal seizure law is unconstitutional in it’s form… I wish I could be a fly on the wall up at the Stevens County Prosecutors office right now.

Having considered the State of Washington’s motion for discretionary review and Ms. Deskins’ cross-motion for discretionary review of a Stevens County Superior Court order affirming in part and reversing in part Ms. Deskins’ district court conviction, Ms. Deskins’ response to the State’s motion, the record, file, and oral argument of counsel, and being of the opinion with regard to the State’s motion that discretionary review is not warranted in light of In re Personal Restraint of St. Pierre, 118 Wn.2d 321, 326, 823 P.2d 492 (1992) (a new rule of criminal procedure applies retroactively to all cases pending and not yet final), Holland v. City of Tacoma, 90 Wn App. 533, 538, 954 P.2d 290 (1998) and In fe Estate of Lint, 135 Wn.2d 518, 532, 957 P.2d 755 (1998) (judicial consideration will not be given when only passing treatment is given to an issue or it is lacking in reasoned argument; the appellate court will not comb the record in order to construct arguments for counsel); and being of the opinion with regard to Ms. Deskins’ motion that discretionary review is warranted in light of State v. Bobenhouse, 143 Wn. App. 315, 325, 177 P.3d 209 (2008), aff’d, 166 Wn.2d 881, 892 , n. 4, 214 P.3d 907 (2009) (a unanimity error amounts to a manifest constitutional error and therefore may be raised for the first time on appeal), State v. Simonson, 91 Wn. App. 8724, 883, 960 P.2d 955 (1998) (a unanimity instruction is required, whether requested or not, when a jury could find from the evidence that the defendant committed a single charged offense on two or more distinct occasions”), along with State v. Coleman, 159 Wn.2d 509, 512, 150 P.3d 1126 (2007), State v. Petrich 101 Wn.2d 566,569,683 P.2d 173 (1984); State v. Bray, 52 Wn. App. 30,34, 756 P.2d 1332 (1988) (when information charges one of several alternative means, it is error to instruct the jury on the uncharged alternatives); State v. Paulson, 131 Wn. App. 579, 588, 128 P.3d 133 (2006) (a court may only impose a sentence authorized by statute and if the court exceeds its sentencing authority, it’s actions are void); RCW 16.52.200(3) (forfeiture of only “animals held by law enforcement or animal care and control authorities” and “the owner shall be prohibited from owning or caring for any similar animals”); RCW 16.52.165 (limits the fine for conviction to $150); and State v. Besio, 80 Wn. App. 426, 431, 907 P.2d 1220 (1995) (“the SRA scheme applies solely to felony convictions”); now, therefore,

IT IS ORDERED, the State of Washington’s motion for discretionary review is denied; Ms. Deskins’ motion for discretionary review is granted.
July 8, 2011.

The other side of the Coin… Tim Rasmussen

In all sides of a story there are different
aspects, although it doesn’t excuse some of Mr Rasmussen’s own behavior I must point out the Good he has done. In investigating him further I found that he seems to be THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS STATE that can get a handle on CPS, all the politicians are commenting after the fact about “how worried they are” but not a single one of them has done ANYTHING about it, except for Mr Rasmussen.

Now why in the world would I write a
complimentary piece about him? Why wouldn’t I? I am not trying to destroy the man I am very preturbed with him for malicious prosecutions, & for for turning a blind eye to other crimes, but in order to fully understand what power
he holds, you should see all sides of him. It is also a lesson in what power can produce, the Good & the Bad. The problem is this was all there was to it, nothing else was done, it was good for election time news but it all just went away once the votes were in. Do I believe it is because HE gave up on it? Do I believe HE only did this for election purposes? Nope. I believe in spite of what my personal opinion is he still cares deeply for children.

Collen Beimer, of Bonney Lake, Wash., attended a meeting about
Child Protective Services workers, who were called heavy- handed. “My
grandbabies are gone,” she said. OLYMPIA – Lawmakers, parents and an
Eastern Washington prosecutor on Thursday blasted state child-protection
officials, saying the state is too quick to remove children from
their families. “The system is broken. The children are forgotten,” said
Stevens County Prosecutor Tim Rasmussen. He said he found “a culture of deceit
and deception” among Child Protective Services workers in Colville. The
standing-room-only crowd, numbering about 100, was full of parents and
grandparents, some holding photographs of children. Thursday’s meeting was
called by state Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, who’s been critical of state officials
for months in a case involving a couple’s efforts to get custody of their
3-year-old granddaughter. “Lies are put on desks,” Roach said on the Senate
floor later in the day. “Children are being hurt.” A spokeswoman for the
Department of Social and Health Services said officials take such allegations
seriously. “If someone believes that any of our staff have been dishonest,
falsified documents or have retaliated against families, we ask that people
report this to the Children’s Administration or Office of the Family and
Children’s Ombudsman,” Sherry Hill said. “The first priority of the
Children’s Administration is the safety of children,” she said. “Our goal is to
keep children in their home as long as they are safe.” Of the child abuse
and neglect cases investigated, she said, fewer than 20 percent result in the
children being placed in foster care. And when that does happen, Hill said, “we
then work toward reunification with the family if that is possible.” Still,
it’s clear that many lawmakers are concerned. About a dozen attended. State
Rep. Joel Kretz, R-Wauconda, said he’s heard an “incredible” number of
complaints from credible people. “The agency self-investigates. They write
their own reports,” he said. “You can imagine what those
look like.”

State Rep. Maralyn Chase, D-Edmonds, said she’s worried about reports that
social workers retaliate against parents and relatives trying to keep or gain
custody of children. “I am deeply troubled at what I am finding in
falsification of documents by social workers,” she said. And Kretz, Roach
and Rasmussen raised concerns that social workers “target” certain children for
removal from a home. That includes young kids, children who haven’t been
molested, and those who come from families that weren’t involved in drugs.
“Completely untrue,” Hill said afterward. Social workers cannot remove children
from a home without a superior court order, she said. (Police and some medical
providers, she added, can authorize removal without a court order.) It’s
true that sometimes the workers may make mistakes or that some may violate
rules, Hill said. But if so, she said, the department wants to hear about it and
will investigate it.

Washington ranks third highest among states for the percentage of children
placed with relatives, she said. Some 38 percent of those taken or given up by a
parent live with relatives, she said, up from 30 percent nine years ago.
Rasmussen said courts need more authority to review and control child
placements. He and Roach are also calling for more opening of the court and
agency files involving such decisions. “You have the power to change this
and you should,” Rasmussen told lawmakers. It’s unclear, however, whether
there will be any changes. Lawmakers took no action Thursday, except to urge the
audience to organize and lobby the rest of the Legislature for changes. There
are no bills to make changes, and this year’s legislative session is scheduled
to end April 26. As for Rasmussen’s allegations about the Colville office,
DSHS defends its workers. Randy Hart, interim assistant secretary of the
Children’s Administration, said recent case reviews showed that “the staff in
Colville are committed to working with families and children in the community
and helping them get the services they need.” He also said the agency
is investigating the allegations raised by Rasmussen. He said the prosecutor
didn’t ask the Children’s Administration for any documents or records, nor ask
to speak with any supervisor or manager about specific cases. Prompted by a
letter from Kretz last summer, Hart said, DSHS asked a state ombudsman to do an
independent review of the Colville office. The review, he said, should be done
by early May. “Staff have been open to scrutiny,” he said, and have
worked with families, foster parents and others in critical
family decisions.

Trouble in Colville, WA: Child Protective Services In
The Crosshairs

To paraphrase Shakespeare, something is rotten in the remote northeast corner
of Washington State. It’s the child welfare system. A new Ombudsman report
finds a “serious crisis of confidence” that’s putting children and
families at risk. The report seems to confirm what community leaders have been
saying for months. Correspondent Austin Jenkins recently visited Colville, WA
and filed this story. It’s a spring evening in Colville. Leigh Roubideaux’s
daughters – ages 7 and 4 – are playing on their swing set in their front yard.

Leigh Roubideaux’s daughters were taken by CPS in
2008

It was a very different picture last August. That’s when Roubideaux’s kids
strayed into the busy street in front of their house.

Someone called the police and soon Child Protective Services was knocking at
the door. Roubideaux – who has developmental disabilities – remembers that day
well.

Leigh Roubideaux: “I was petrified. I was in tears.”

CPS took the kids away. It took three weeks and the support of friends and
neighbors – like local businesswoman Lisa Shinn – for Roubideaux to get her
daughters back. Shinn thinks CPS discriminated against Roubideaux because of her
disability and the fact she’s Native American.

Lisa Shinn: “We would all have our children taken away if someone saw them
playing in the street everyone would have their children taken by CPS if that is
the criteria.”

This is just one example of a litany of complaints against Children and
Family Services in Northeast Washington. Stevens County Prosecutor Tim
Rasmussen sits in an easy chair in his living room with two accordion files at
his feet. In those files are the stories of people who feel they’ve been wronged
by state child welfare officials.

Tim Rasmussen: “There’s a lot of human tragedy here. There’s a lot of tragic,
tragic situations.” For the past many months — at the request of a state
lawmaker — Rasmussen has collected accounts of what he calls a “pattern of
misconduct” by the Colville, Washington office of Children and Family Services.
In one of the more high profile cases, five children were removed from the home
of a well-known foster family. A judge later called it a “slap in the face” and
an “overreaction” that resulted in “tremendous upheaval” for the children. Some
of them were siblings who were separated from each other. Rasmussen’s theory is
that caseworkers overreacted because of something horrible that happened in
Colville back in 2005. A 7-year-old boy named Tyler DeLeon was starved to death
by his foster mother.

Tim Rasmussen: “What’s happening now is just a different chapter in the book
if you would. Tyler DeLeon is one chapter and they missed the mark in one
direction and in some of the current cases they appear to have missed the mark
in another direction.” Prosecutor Rasmussen recently wrote a letter to Governor
Chris Gregoire that says he believes there’s a “culture of deceit and deception”
within the Colville child welfare office. He’s even considering criminal
charges against a CPS worker for violating a court order. Rasmussen isn’t
the only one critical of Children and Family Services. Patty Markel runs the
CASA program in Stevens County. These are the Court Appointed Special
Advocates who represent the children in child dependency cases. She alleges that
CPS caseworkers act in a “willy-nilly” fashion that’s personality driven and
motivated by a fear of lawsuits.

Patty Markel: “What I see now is more liability-driven decision making. And
that’s concerning because that’s not necessarily – this whole system is supposed
to be about the best interests of children” You hear a similar theme from Barry
Bacon – a family physician in Colville. He says CPS workers often ignore the
advice of local doctors like him. Instead, from what he’s seen, they take kids
to Spokane – 70 miles away – to see the doctor. Dr. Barry Bacon: “They would
rather continue with their opinion and destroy a child rather than admit that
they’ve made a mistake. It’s unbelievable. I mean it’s like the Wild West. They
are a law unto themselves which is one of the biggest issues we have with
them.”

The Department of Social and Health Services has reviewed the cases flagged
by Prosecutor Rasmussen and in a recent report finds no wrongdoing by
caseworkers. But in a separate investigation by state Ombudsman Mary Meinig, a
disturbing portrait of the Colville office emerges. Over the past two years, the
Ombudsman’s office has received 62 complaints regarding child welfare practices
in the Northeast corner of Washington. So far in 16 of those cases, the
Ombudsman found – in her words – “violations of law, policy, procedure; clearly
unreasonable actions; or simply poor social work practice.” Beyond that
Meinig says her investigation revealed a “culture of pervasive distrust” between
CPS workers and other professionals in the community. But rather than pinning
all the blame on CPS, Meinig says everyone involved needs to do a better job of
working together. Mary Meinig: “Our report says the kids are at-risk and
families are at-risk because of the lack of trust, cooperation, collaboration
and communication that’s going on within the community.” The situation is so
serious, Meinig believes, that the lives of vulnerable children are on the line.
Mary Meinig: “Well if it doesn’t improve I would say it would be a matter of
time before we have an even more serious incidents – possible child fatality or
near fatality.” Like others, Meinig believes past tragedies – like the
starvation death of Tyler DeLeon – are influencing the decisions made by CPS
workers and have led to a climate of distrust.

In haunting language, she writes the “ghosts of children past…sit in the
collective conscience as reminders of where the system failed.” But Meinig’s
report is not devoid of hope. She recommends several steps to start rebuilding
trust. This includes bringing in an outside professional mediator and creating a
diverse community advisory board. How does Children and Family Services respond
to all this? Marty Butkovich, DSHS Regional Administrator: “Obviously
relationships need to be improved.” Marty Butkovich is the Administrator who
oversees the Colville CPS office. He acknowledges there’s been a breakdown in
communication. But he calls his staff “exceptional.” And he says he’s seen
nothing to suggest his employees need to be disciplined or fired. Marty
Butkovich: “We’re not the bad guy. This is very difficult work, very emotional
work and some very difficult decisions are being made as it relates to kids and
people have strong feelings about some of those decisions and not always in
agreement.” As for whether a fear of lawsuits is driving decisions to take
children away, Butkovich admits that does weigh on caseworkers’
minds. Marty Butkovich: “Liability is something that is very obvious and
tort and being sued and deaths – all the real bad things that are out there –
can be in a social workers mind and if they’re stressed and tired and so ya it
can be there.” Department of Social and Health Services officials say they
believe relations in Northeast Washington have improved over the past year – but
there’s still work to be done. The agency plans to put a corrective action plan
into place. The problems in Colville have even reached Governor Chris Gregoire.
She said in response to the Ombudsman report she wants the agency to –
quote – “refocus on what’s important” – the children they’re charged with
protecting.

Vancouver Washington Corruption
This blog shares honest, open and important information pertaining to The City of Vancouver, Washington and Clark County. We want to keep an archive of corruption, misdoings and sketchy activities that take place here in Vancouver, Washington and Clark Co
0

Above the Law
So let’s talk about why most lawyers drink themselves asleep in dark rooms and how attorneys are a lot like professional athletes. Oh, and Justice Scalia called people Nazis, and the royal baby proved how awful punditry can be…
0

The Dog Place
Another INCREDIBLE site for Animal Owners & Animal Owner rights, loaded with tons of need to know information
0

Finally Home Rescue
Please visit our site to see animals available for adoption! Also to see a list of the things we desparately need to continue saving dogs
0

Pet Breeders & Owners
Our goal is to educate the public in current pet and animal legislation, and how they can get involved to protect their rights. Certain organizations are lobbying away your rights to own a pet, or animal(s) of any kind. Only you have the power to stop you
0

Popehat
A number of Popehat’s authors are attorneys, work in closely related fields, or have strong interests in politics, law is also a relative constant in the site’s focus.
0

Forfeiture Endangers American Rights (FEAR)
FEAR achieved the nation’s first major federal forfeiture law reform at the turn of the millenium, the government was allowed to keep whatever property it seized without ever having to prove a case
0

Government of Law
Site dedicated to promoting Government of Law. Initially it is focussed on the Washington State judicial system.
0

Finally Home Rescue & Ministries
Bringing people & animals together through Faith, Love, Hope & Healing… Please visit our Ministry site, in spite of alll the ugliness going on we can still focus on helping others.
0

Memory of Chaucer
THE MEMORY OF MY BELOVED YORKIE, WHO REINFORCED IN ME THE PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE OF UNBRIDLED LOYALTY, AND WHO I SERENDIPITOUSLY BOUGHT FROM A PET STORE IN MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA, WHICH OBTAINED HIM FROM A MISSOURI BREEDER
0